Jump to content

Castlecruncher

Members
  • Content Count

    469
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Castlecruncher

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Idaho

Recent Profile Visitors

758 profile views
  1. Alrighty, second half is available here: https://imgur.com/a/pViUOqz So--my thoughts! The battle was a jolly good time all around. I was a bit surprised by how much the Empire seemed to steam-roll the Scum; I suppose a lot of that comes from the Empire investing in expendable troops to take objectives, while the Scum had only a few expensive models, two of which were left on guard duty. That's one of the big concerns I see with using terrain: Model commitment is a lot less forgiving. Once you send someone to one side of the board, they're not likely to head back to the other side. Personally, I find this kind of challenge fun to deal with, but I could see it being difficult or bothersome as well. The mission, as I said, was very off-the-cuff, and the objectives probably could have been improved. A one-off VP boost would have freed up more models, and probably helped keep the Scum in the fight. Overall, the game went rather well (even if I secretly hoped the Scum would win), and I look forward to making more! Taking pictures during a game is new for me, and I may have went a bit overboard--I also waxed a bit eloquent with my descriptions, since I enjoy the story of a match just as much as the match itself. I hope to introduce a couple more friends to IA this week, and will hopefully be able to get some more games in with actual opponents. Exciting! If I have anymore battles on proper terrain, I'll be sure to post them here, for science.
  2. Well, crud, looks like all my images were broken. How splendidly mortifying! I've uploaded the images with their related flavor text to Imgur (lacking any better place to put them), and edited the post to match. The link can be found here: https://imgur.com/a/ZCTldHz Now to finish the second half; properly, this time.
  3. To be fair, these are little plastic toys for grown men and women to play with while upholding a pretense of being adults. I, for one, think they're rather nice poses, and I'm not at all concerned about whether or not my clone trooper model is in a tactically advantageous position or not. They look like they're in some kind of space battle, and that's all I, in all my humble ignorance, can ask for. Of course, you're free to disagree, and even to not buy models you think look ridiculous, just as other are free to disagree with you and make their own educated purchasing decisions. Such is the beauty of commerce. Case in point I'd say: lightsabers slice through battle droids like a warm knife through butter. I'm skeptical a sword could manage a same, suggesting a lightsaber's way more dangerous. Heck, if we wanna get silly, we can just compare the stats of lightsabers to vibrowswords from whichever SWRPG you please! Still though, I agree that the Kenobi pose is fitting--it's historically inspired (which suits narratively, as much of the SW films take some inspiration from history), and (and this is perhaps the most important) Jedi have access to the Force, which helps them use their lightsabers without slicing their own limbs off. (If we wanna get technical, there have been non-Force users that have wielded lightsabers, but I'd argue the Jedi are better equipped for it.)
  4. I think it's very well made, and very fun to watch, but honestly I feel like what makes it fun (the action, the fast-pace, the struggle) is what kinda kills it for me. I've always preferred the interpretation of the film's duel (which in comparison looks like two old men poking sticks at each other and sometimes remembering to pretend like they're fighting) that they're both exceptionally experienced and in tune with the force, and they know one slip will mean instant death. The entire fight in the film is very evenly matched, whereas here Obi-Wan is clearly at the disadvantage. I think this video makes for a far more compelling scene on its own, but for the overall narrative doesn't work for me as much (I'd've preferred a scene that really builds on that quite intensity, like a scene from The Duelist). Still, that's just me being nitpicky--I think it's a wonderful piece, and a splendid addition to Star Wars fan films. Gotta appreciate the dedication behind a piece like this.
  5. So I managed to get a solo game in today, and took lots and lots of pictures! To start off, the lists: Scum is Darth Diala (proxy for Maul), Trandoshan Hunters (Elite and Regular), Clawdite Shapeshifters (Elite and Regular), and a Nexu (Elite). Empire is Imperial Officer (Elite), Stormtroopers (Elite and 2 Regulars), Sentry Droids (Regular), and Royal Guard. I got really creative with the setup--a couple years back, I made a dice-carrier for my old Star Wars RPG, and recently discovered it was relatively in-scale with 28mm! The only logical conclusion was to use it as a terrain piece, and so my battle was over two sides trying to capture the famed Lady Luck (not to be confused with the craft of one Lando Calrissian, who is presently under lawsuit for identify theft: ship class). The objectives were dirt simple: a marker in each corner and one on the Lady Luck; at the end of the round, if you are the only one with models touching a marker, that marker wins you 2VP. Easy peasy, nexu squeasy. I played a bit fast and loose with deployment and initiative (I just set up each side one at a time then rolled for first initiative), and we ended with the scene found in this link: Magical Link of Magical Qualities
  6. From the perspective of a guy with only a middling collection of X-Wing ships (three starter sets from poorly coordinated birthday gifts and a couple of miscelanious fighters bought mostly for looking cool), the idea of needing to drop $100 just to let both my fleets be viable is absurd. It's one of the issues I have with FFG's "cards in the box" style of producing--sure, GW is profit gouging you out the wazoo, but when they break the game, they can just say "Whoops, let's release a new book that corrects the old books," and then everyone buys the new book with marginal grumbling. When the rules are collected not in a book but on cards, it becomes very hard to correct it without leaving a lot of confused customers wondering why their boxes have obsolete cards. Connecting this back to IA then: There fortunately doesn't seem to be much danger of this happening. IA is a boardgame first, skirmish game second--thus, I expect 2.0 to come replete with new models, new tiles, new rules, new... Everything! The concern, then, might be that IA 1.0 is now obsolete, but not at all--it's a completely different game, with its own rules and models and whatsits. Sure, as players with full collections of personalized builds it can be frustrating to start from ground one again, but you're spending your money on real product (models, rules, tiles, cards, etc.), not on a fixer for old product (just new cards and tiles). I am hopeful for IA 2.0. I feel like IA different enough from FFG's other titles that it can stand its own, though perhaps with some repurposing (it might need retouching to stand out against its strapping you get brother Legion). Anywho, hopefully that wasn't terribly incoherent.
  7. I haven't even looked at the rules for Legion (seen games and reviews, heard it's good but the scale isn't my cup of tea), but that's a good point about the math with cover and such--it changes the game when a unit that might normally widdle away at an enemy can't hit because they're behind a wall. That said, from my experience it hasn't broken the game by any means--maybe it's just my boards and tactics, but I've almost never found myself using cover in the few games I've played, because weapons have such short range you have no choice but to get into the thick of it. That's another thing that changes: whenever I've played on the grid, I've found that I just run close enough to enemies that I almost never need to worry about Accuracy. Sometimes I even forget to check! On a board, it's way different--combat usually doesn't set in 'til Round 2 on a 3'x3' table, and even then it's pot shots that typically go wide. So overall, the game is definitely different from typical Skirmish on a board, but as far as I can tell not broken--cover isn't a viable strategy when no one gets close enough for you to shoot, and objectives can help break up firing lines. I haven't had any trouble with characters not dying easy enough, though I've only had three games; I'll have to do some more testing, maybe set more rules and come up with some missions. I'll be sure to post my progress here, for my own amusement if nothing else. And I totally get people that prefer Legion. Personally, I prefer IA just for the bargain of getting a board game and skirmish game all in one--this is just my way of scratching my "miniatures on a board of pretty terrain" itch without needing to fork out even more dough to our FFG and Disney Overlords. I can totally get that--it's definitely a lot cleaner, and you never have to worry about Wobbly Model Syndrome, or deciding whether a millimeter's difference is enough to constitute in-or-out of range. It's fun in its own right, to be sure, but sometime's I just gotta set up something more dynamic than a bunch of 2D tiles. As I said above, my boards have been 3'x3', and the size has been just right; it's small enough that the troops get fighting in decent order, big enough that you can put in a decent selection of terrain. Some people might prefer bigger boards, which I could see being an issue (4'x4' could be trouble, and I can't imagine 6'x'4' working very well), but I've been used to 3'x3', and it serves its purpose well.
  8. So this is a smidge unorthodox, but what do people around here think of running Skirmish games on traditional 3D terrain boards, a la Legion? As it happens, this is how I first tested IA's Skirmish, and I've found it to be some of the most fun I've had in gaming. There's something about setting up a cramped imperial space port, replete with walkways and storage containers, and watch as two small bands of Rebels and Imperials scatter to secure objectives and harry the enemy forces. I've already run a couple of games with my little brother and one of my RPG friends, and it's immediately clear that the terrain takes IA to another level you don't experience with just the tiles. Of course, the obvious question for me is: Why not just play Legion? Well, beyond not wanting to pop another eighty buckarinos (LGS price) to get a starter set with half a force for yet another Star Wars game, I've never been a fan of squad-based combat. I'm more a fan of man-to-man combat, like Mordheim or Infinity (though the specific rulesets for those games never spoke to me)--Skirmish gaming, if you will, which is literally what Imperial Assault Skirmish is about. There are a couple of kerfuffles with the rules, but most of it is either self-explanatory or easy enough to resolve: distances are converted to inches, and you measure from base-to-base to find range; climbing either counts as moving vertical (e.g. climbing onto a 2" box costs 2" of movement), or if there's a lot of buildings can just take a full move (so you need to move up to the base, then take a full action to go from the bottom to the top--more of an off-the-cuff ruling than thought out); shooting from height means measure diagonal distance; cover is harder to judge, since there's no square corners, so I just say half-or-more cover is +1 defense result (i.e. cancels one damage), and obviously full cover is no-hit (what constitutes how much cover is a judgement call). All-in-all, it's very lighthearted and focused on having a fun time, and 100% unconcerned with meta--all I know is slap a bunch of cool lookin' models on the table and we're gonna have a good time. So in all, it's a jolly fun time, and I'm curious whether others would be interested in the concept, or whether I'm some form of gaming heretic and ought report myself to the board-game inquisition post-haste.
  9. You know it's funny, I was just thinking about how much I liked these characters and how cool it would be to use 'em in Imperial Assault, and here you've gone and written up rules for 'em. Excellent work!
  10. Fragged Empire is one of my favorite settings, and I've wanted to play it for years, but darned if I can make sense of its mechanics. Recently, my brother told me he was starting up a game in the setting, and when I suggested we use Genesys, he tasked me with writing the rules. My biggest hold up with writing these rules is that I'm going to be a player in this rule set (as opposed to the GM, as I'm used to), so I'm wary of accidentally making things too favorable for my or my allies' characters. So, I figured I'd pop in here and see if any of you fine folks might offer some assistance. At the moment I'm none too worried about Talents (the Core set ought to work well enough, and if we want more later we can deal with it then), and wanted to first focus on the four species of Fragged Empire. My general philosophy when designing races for a game is to give them each a minor passive ability and a major once-per-session power. I didn't bother to choose EXP or Wound/Strain Thresholds yet, but I'll get to them soon enough. Here's what I got so far: Corporate Brawn Agility Intellect Cunning Willpower Presence 1 2 2 2 2 3 Starting Skills: +1 to any Social Skill of your choice Well Off: Begin the game with +500 starting Credits Make Your Own Luck: Once per session, after rolling for a check, you may choose to reroll the entire check, keeping the new result (even if it’s worse than before) Kaltoran Brawn Agility Intellect Cunning Willpower Presence 2 2 2 3 1 2 Starting Skills: +1 to Perception, Vigilance, or Cool Lowlight Vision: Remove up to 2 Setbacks caused by darkness Vision from the Ancestors: Once per session, you may flip a Destiny Point from Dark to Light Optional - Blind: You are incapable of sight; reduce the difficulty of Perception and Vigilance Checks based on hearing by 1. Perception and Vigilance Checks that rely on sight are now impossible. You may otherwise perform as normal (no effect to combat or Initiative checks, and your character can navigate the same as other characters). Legion Brawn Agility Intellect Cunning Willpower Presence 3 2 2 1 2 2 Starting Skills: +1 to any Combat Skill Cold Resilient: Never receive Setback due to cold; exceptional cold may still harm a Legion by GM discretion (such as near-0 Kelvin). Tough as Nails: Once per session, spend a Destiny Point to reduce the effect of a Critical Injury to 01 Nephilim - Emissary Brawn Agility Intellect Cunning Willpower Presence 2 2 3 2 2 1 Starting Skills: +1 to Medicine, Mechanics, or Brawl Fast Healing: Whenever you received healing, you may take 1 Strain to recover 1 additional Wound Mind of Eden: Once per session, spend a Destiny Point to use your Intellect as the Skill rating for a check The next thing I need to work on is the money system--using Credits (a la the vanilla money system) would be the simplest way, but doesn't fit the theme of the game, and I much prefer the mechanics of Fragged Empire where you allocate Resources rather than spend money (one of the few things I enjoyed about the system). I'm considering jury-rigging the GM's Weapon Creation toolkit into a Resource-based Build-a-Gun-Workshop (with Corporates getting double starting Resources), but that's a bit off so far. Ships will likely just be ported over from EotE, for ease of access. What do y'all think? Any suggestions, recommendations, concerns, criticisms? I'll be passing this along to my GM soon, so of course he gets the final word, but anything is appreciated. Best Wishes, --CastleCruncher
  11. Hear, hear! Maybe it's different with other groups, but my players have usually maxed out at around eight or so Stimpacks/Health Potions/Ambiguous-Wound-Reducers on any given character at a time, and even then combat can come very close as their stims start healing less and less and the criticals keep getting worse and worse (at which point they start babbling about some mer-sea concept I can't fathom). Really though, I agree with the others--either stick to good ol' "10 Enc. 0 Items = 1 Enc." or increase price to make them more scarce. Alternatively, increase their rarity. In a previous game, I made healing items practically non-existent, and only available at great expense from extraordinary locations. It made them feel very much like a treasured resource, and added some genuine wonder to locations where magical "Healing Salve" was widely available.
  12. Lots of good responses, though it seems some people may have misunderstood what I was getting at a bit (perhaps I presented it poorly, oh well). As far as actually playing the game, I've traditionally gone without any miniatures or terrain. When we get to combat, I usually grab a sheet of paper and draw the general lay of the land with little x's and o's to represent the PCs and other characters, and just say "roughly this much is a range band." As far as using miniatures in a game would go, I think I would still just stick to very general range bands, probably in roughly a consistent measurement (like perhaps 6"). I agree that, as far as playing an actual game of Genesys/SWRPG is concerned, a grid system is less than optimal, though is sometimes necessary depending on your setup (for example, using grid-based tiles to build a scene). In that case you can either ignore the grid (which in my experience is visually difficult--"I just want them to stay in the little boxes, dang it!"), or work with it, which is where I would defer to the little rules I outlined above. So basically, I agree with just about all of you--the main reason I came up with the little rules I put above was so that I could create more regulated, non-RPG battles with miniatures using the dice and basic rules of Genesys (a bit silly, perhaps, but I like it), which I posted here in case anyone else ever felt the need to use similar such rules in their campaign, or to see if anyone had any ideas on how to come up with some non-RPG-based rules on how to arrange such miniatures battles with the Genesys system. Basically I was trying to take a beautiful narrative roleplaying system and butcher it into a mildly tactical miniatures skirmish game, and apparently I thought it best to present it as a way to run the RPG portion (I'm certain it could be done, but looking back I really can't imagine trying it myself with such specific rules). That said, I do appreciate the points made so far--thank you all for your input, and don't feel shy if you have any other thoughts.
  13. Hello folks, So I've been thinking for a while about using the basic Genesys system in conjunction with miniatures on a grid or terrain-field. The idea first formed when I planned on doing a Lord of the Rings game with a friend of mine using my collection of LotR miniatures, and it's only grown since. The easy part is figuring out how to play Genesys using miniatures, while the trickier part is finding some way to do almost a mini-wargame that uses the basic Genesys mechanics (Skills, the Dice, Advantage/Disadvantage, etc.). As it stands I've mostly figured out the former, while the latter could perhaps use some work--which is why I figured I'd stop by the forums and see what others think on the idea. So, here's what I have so far: Using Miniatures in Genesys Using miniatures as character tokens, a la the Star Wars beginner sets, is rather straight forward--distances are designed arbitrarily and the models are only vague representations of where characters are. They can easily be used without any rules. Taking things a step further, we can tune Genesys to suit miniatures by converting range-bands into measurements. Each bands represents an equal measurement, somewhere between 4" and 6" (for reference, let's assume out measurement is 6"). So, Engaged would be adjacent/base-to-base, Short is 6", Medium is 12", Long is 18", and Extreme is 24". Anything past Extreme is generally still just Extreme, but if it starts getting absurd the GM can rule that it's just too far. The two basic types of tabletop you can use are terrain-based boards and grid-maps. Grids are fairly easy to work with, since everything is all pre-measured and such--there's not much room for argument as to where you can move and such, except maybe the whole 'diagonal move' question (either it costs 1" or every other diagonal costs 2"). A regular tabletop, with a ruler and such, requires a bit more finesse, and likely lends itself more to arbitrary decisions, preferably in favor of the players. I'll write mostly for terrain-based boards rather than grids, as grids are far more regular. When a character moves, they get to move 6" wherever they please. Generally, if a model can get about 1/2" aways from another model, they're close enough to count as Engaged (on a grid, they just need to be adjacent). To account for Engagement with multiple characters (like a Minion group or several PCs), a model is considered engaged with any model it is adjacent/base-to-base with, as well as any models adjacent/base-to-base with that model. For example, if models A and B are both touching model C, but not each other, they are considered Engaged. Conversely, if model A is touching B, B is touching C, and C is touching D, then A and D are not Engaged (no Conga-lines of Engagement, basically). For combat purposes, if ever you're up against a 'mob' (like a big cluster of Minions), then you can re-position about 1-inch with any attack you make, remaining in contact with the engagement. This is usually used when you kill an enemy, as you "pile in" to fill the gaps and remain Engaged. As usual, you may leave an Engagement at any time with a Movement, free of penalty. Models are also free to pass through any other model, including enemy models in an Engagement, unless the GM specifically declares otherwise--the sort of comparison to this in RPG terms would be whether or not you're free to dash down a corridor filled with six enemies. Some GMs will just let you barrel through, while others will require a Skill Check of some sort, while other (less fun) GMs will just prohibit it entirely. Other than that, it's all mostly just visual story-telling. The rest of the rules work exactly as in the game, and Advantages and Disadvantages and the like are used as to narrative effect. You can use tokens to represent dropped weapons or markers to show environmental effects that arise, but overall it's just a lot of basic intuition. Cover and line-of-sight are generally pretty straight forward, and of course the GM is there to give the final word on what counts as what (e.g. "That's heavy cover, that's dangerous terrain and requires a check to cross, eh, I'll let you move an extra couple of inches, it's close enough"). The end-word here is "Fun," and the models are just here to help out. Doing Battles with Genesys So I've basically got the whole "Using miniatures in Genesys" idea down, as it's mostly just a visual aid with some little rules that can be fudged as necessary to fit the game. My other idea, essentially creating a mini-wargame with Genesys, is a bit trickier. All of the rules above apply the same, except that the players should agree before hand on anything that might call for a GM call. Ranges are more hard-set--the range-bands are used only to determine how many inches a weapon can shoot or a person can move, and from there you rely on the inches rather than any sense of bands. The players might agree to allow for a character to pile-in to Engaged with a model if they're less than an inch away or some such, but it should be made clear at the get-go. Essentially just take all of the rules above and make them set in stone rather than loose guidelines. The harder part is deciding the cost of characters, as well as deciding which Skills and Characteristics and such to use. As far as cost is concerned, giving each player a limit of XP and Credits to spend seems straight-forward, though there's the question of base-cost (maybe 100 XP? 150? 200? Maybe just require both teams have equal numbers?). Skills can probably be limited to Combat Skills, Leadership, Medicine and Mechanics (for healing), Athletics, maybe Cool and Vigilance for Initiative, and any others that seem sensible. Characteristics would be limited to what makes sense, likely Brawn, Agility, and Intelligence (to cover all non-physical Skills). Alternatively you could play with a full set of Skills, and just use far more narrative missions and the like that will call for Skill checks--maybe use a random chart to determine which Skills can be used to activate a given Objective, or have a GM design missions for the Players to run through with their parties to try and compete for. This would probably be the most fun (in my mind, at least), but also the least regular, and would be less like a skirmish game and more like a particularly combat-oriented RPG with players having multiple characters. Closing Thoughts So that's where I'm at with my silly little idea. Still messy, but I only really need to understand it well enough to explain to other players or do little battles against myself (I've never been much for competitive games against others, so these rules are mostly for personal use when I want to have my models duke it out on my desk but can't be bothered with other rules systems out there). Let me know if you have any thought, criticisms, or ideas. I can't imagine there are overly many people interested in making a full on wargame out of Genesys, but maybe some folks might find this all useful for using models in their own games, such as for introducing new players with pretty boards and models or using your old models from before you switched systems.
  14. Guess my sci-fi Western is gonna have some Dinos thrown in... I absolutely love it. Like @Noahjam325 said, the artwork really sells it--I'm actually gonna see if I can't get that book for myself (what self respecting human being wouldn't buy that book?). That said, while as a veteran of the game I can understand just about all of the rules you give, there are probably a couple of places that could use a smidge of improvement. First off, the Background tid-bits could use some better examples and specifics. Right now, they're mostly vague and open to interpretation. I'd suggest imposing some stricter limitations on what the Backgrounds entail, such as saying a Handicap always affects a given Skill (perhaps under a specific circumstance, like Setback to Perception for sight, or to Athletics for running/traveling, etc.). I'd also definitely make Bigotry and Prejudice far more mechanical (such as taking a Setback on all checks dealing with an opposing group), and keep them as one modifier, saying that you don't get along with a certain group, with the general reasoning being "We have bad blood in the past," making current interactions uncomfortable/dangerous/downright awkward. I know that bigotry and prejudice were unfortunately rather prevalent in the time period, but we're riding dinosaurs here--I feel like keeping prejudice to around the level of blood-feud would be the most comfortable for most players (of course, some people are okay with exploring such serious topics in their games, so that's your call). Another thing: It looks like the dinosaurs need some finishing up (some of them are missing prices and Minion/Rival/Nemesis status). Again, I really like the concept and where it's going--all of the basic ideas are there, and are understandable enough as to be easily playable for someone who knows what they're doing. That said, there's always room for improvement, and I feel like that extra polish would help bring this to the next level. Great job on what you have, and I look forward to see how it progresses.
  15. These days, my response to these kinds of situations is: roll with it. Players think the random hobo I mentioned offhandedly is somehow important? Well maybe he just so happens to be the town coot that keeps tabs on everyone and knows EXACTLY what happened that night in the farm house, but is too afraid for his life to come forward and will make a break for it the moment he thinks the PCs are on to him. I throw in a neat random encounter with a crashed spaceship in our fantasy setting and the players decide it's a threat to the world and must be stopped? Guess I need to have some magic-robots start raiding the countryside and present a serious threat to the adventure I had originally planned. I agree, these moments are great, but always remember to roll with them. Few things are as satisfying as being rewarded for two hours of obsessing over a random hobo and cracking the case thanks to your good eye and keen wit; few things are as frustrating as realizing that hobo was pointless and you just wasted a session on him. You might laugh ruefully over the latter, but you'll smile like a lark for the former (especially years later when the GM says "Remember Jim the Deceiver, head of the Eldritch Cult of Doom and bringer of the last days? Yeah, he was entirely unplanned."). Just something to consider if you don't employ it already. Of course, I play very by the hip these days (I don't even prepare notes most times), which lends itself to letting he PCs create the adventure hooks, but it can still lead to some very rewarding sessions and stories if you let it.
×
×
  • Create New...